I agree with you Michael sort of… in my view… science has not been proven wrong because there is no right and wrong with models of reality. It is a question of degree of fit. The theories now fit better… or has reality moved? That is the question. I like that about seeking less and less about more and more.

This science blog post doesn't mean that I am anti-science, far from it. I love science, as I do also the arts, philosophy, wealth creation etc. etc. but only because I have continuously sought to find out the answers for myself from a 1st person perspective and not as a result of only being told how to think by priests, politicians, academia, intellectual elites and the fifth estate! - thank goodness for Apple, Hypercard, Tim Berners Lee, http, the internet, blogging and now zaadz.

Whose science IS IT anyway? asks Michael Brooks in his article; re-iterating Jose Ortega’s insight that the majority of scientists are - ”shut up in the narrow cell of their laboratory, like the bee in the cell of its hive” and felt that, every now and then, scientists should look at the cultural valueplaced on science, and consider “how society and the heart of man are to be organised in order that there may continue to be [scientific] investigators”.

“The signs of environmentalism’s death are all around us: we speak in terms of technical policies, NOT vision and values; we propose20th-century solutions to 21st-century problems; we are failing to attract young people, the physical embodiment of the future, to our cause; we’re failing to attract the disenfranchised, the disempowered, the dispossessed and the disengaged; we treat our mental categories, ourselves and other elements of nature as THINGS; most of all, environmentalism IS no longer capable of generating the power it needs to deal with the world’s most serious ecological problems.”

Space storm alert:90 seconds from catastrophe - says the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS), in its latest report about the threat of Solar Storms and the scientific community declare, after its Copenhagen emergency meeting, that …

Rarely is this more true than in the case of climate change, where it is nowtime for emergency counselling. One point repeatedly made at last week's climate change congress in Copenhagen was that formulating an action plan tocurb climate change isNOTthe job of scientists.

“Science, like theology, reveals transcendent truths abouta changing world.The best scientists are moral individuals whose business isto seek the truth.Corruption of this process undermines not just democracy but civilization itself.”

Jim Lovelock is an iconic figure in British science, a prophet whose prophecies are coming true.Lovelock is best known as the 'father' of Gaia theory, which is now established as the most useful way of understanding the dramatic changes happening to the environment of the Earth.

Yet,throughout his life - as a student, independent scientist and writer -
Lovelock has met with disagreement and disparagement. His drive came
from personal belief, curiosity and conviction. He has been right for
all his working life and, although it is frightening for us to believe
the scenario he describes inThe Vanishing Face of Gaia, he is right again.

The Vanishing Face of Gaiais James Lovelock's final word on the terrifying environmental problems
we will confront in the twenty-first century. The earth as we know it
is vanishing. It is moving inexorably to a new, hot state. The idea
that we can “save the planet” by reducing carbon emissions is, Lovelock
writes, nothing but a sales pitch. The earth, as it always has done,
will save itself. It is up to us to save the human race.

As heapproaches his 90th birthday, James Lovelock looks forward to what he
describes as “a hell of an upgrade”, as Richard Branson is sending him
into space with Virgin Galactic, so he can, for the first time, see the
face of Gaia.

Weeach need to take personal responsibility for acting in whatever way we
can to ensure the renewable world scenario emerges, acting from our
highest self and our greatest strengths. Could you live with your
conscience knowing the consequences of inaction? Each of us can and
does make a difference, even in the smallest ways.

The lesson from all this? Don't be surprised – or disappointed – when scientists don't get everything right all the time. Science has delivered a host of developments that have made life safer, better and longer-lasting for all of us.

BUT there have always been bumps in the road of discovery – and while science remains a human endeavour, there always will be.”

Certainty and confidence in science marked its development in the 19th and much of the 20th centuries, but now it carries on unaware that the determinism that had so long enlivened it IS DEAD. The recocognition
that science was provisional and could never be certain was always
there in the MINDS of GOOD SCIENTISTS.

Gradually the world of science has evolved to the dangerous point where computer model-building has precedence over observation and measurement,especially in Earth and Life Sciences. In certain ways modelling by
scientists has become a threat to the foundation on which science has
stood: the acceptance that nature is always the final arbiter and that hypothesis must always be tested by experiment and observation in the real world.

One of James Lovelock'smost beautiful pieces of hard science - which tipped the balance in
favour of Gaia - is his discovery of a great cycle in which algae in
the oceans produce volatile sulphur compounds that act as seeds to form
the oceanic clouds. Without these dimethyl sulphide “seeds”, the
cooling oceanic clouds would be lost.

Lovelock is NOTa doom-monger but a practical problem-solving man, with suggestions for
alleviating the climate crisis at many levels. In the short term, as
far as energy is concerned, his answer is nuclear power, followed soon
after by thermal solar power, produced by huge arrays of mirrors in the
prime deserts of the word, such as Arizona and the Sahara. His own
proposal for reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide is an ingenious
spin-off from his algal-cloud theory. Large plastic cylinders thrust
vertically into the ocean could bring nutrient-rich lower waters to the
surface, producing an algal bloom that would increase the cloud cover.

help both Buddhists and scientists. Insights transmitted by realized practitioners like the Buddhas and bodhisattvas can be a source of inspiration and support for both Buddhist practitioners and scientists, and scientific tests can help Buddhist practitioners understand better and have more confidence in the insight they receive from their ancestral teachers.